Palestinians are an "invented people", says US Presidential hopeful Gingrich

The US Republican presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich has declared that the Palestinians are an "invented" people who want to destroy Israel.

The Jewish Channel, a cable TV station, posted online its interview with the former US House speaker , who has risen to the top of Republican nomination candidates to challenge Democratic President Barack Obama in the November 2012 election.

Gingrich differed from official US policy that respects the Palestinians as a people deserving of their own state based on negotiations with Israel. "Remember, there was no Palestine as a state. It was part of the Ottoman Empire" until the early 20th century, Gingrich said.

The US Republican presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich has declared that the Palestinians are an "invented" people who want to destroy Israel.

The Jewish Channel, a cable TV station, posted online its interview with the former US House speaker , who has risen to the top of Republican nomination candidates to challenge Democratic President Barack Obama in the November 2012 election.

Gingrich differed from official US policy that respects the Palestinians as a people deserving of their own state based on negotiations with Israel. "Remember, there was no Palestine as a state. It was part of the Ottoman Empire" until the early 20th century, Gingrich said.

"I think that we’ve had an invented Palestinian people who are in fact Arabs and who were historically part of the Arab community. And they had a chance to go many places, and for a variety of political reasons we have sustained this war against Israel now since the 1940s, and it’s tragic," he said.

Most historians mark the start of Palestinian Arab nationalist sentiment as 1834, when Arab residents of the Palestinian region revolted against Ottoman rule.

Modern-day Israel, founded amid the 1948 Arab-Israel war, took shape along the lines of a 1947 UN plan for ethnic partition of the then-British ruled territory of Palestine. Arabs rejected the division.

Gingrich and other Republican candidates are seeking to attract Jewish support by vowing to bolster US ties with Israel if elected.

Gingrich said the Hamas militant group, which controls the Gaza Strip, and the the governing Palestinian Authority, which controls the West Bank, represented "an enormous desire to destroy Israel".

Asked about these [Gingrich’s] remarks, Ron Paul disagreed saying that under the Ottoman Empire neither the Israelis or the Palestinians had an official state. Paul accused Gingrich of “stirring up trouble.” Paul’s views on the Israel-Palestine conflict are controversial.

Unlike many in both the Republican and Democratic parties, Paul has been a harsh critic of Israeli actions against Palestinians, and an even harsher critic of the US government’s unqualified support of Israel – a country he believes should manage its own destiny.

On Twitter, Gary Johnson – who was once again not invited to the debate - echoed Paul saying that Israel will determine its own future and that it’s wrong for us to presume to determine it for them.

Paul has been campaigning hard in Iowa. Can his free-market populism help him pass up Gingrich and Romney in the polls? Will his remarks on Israel and his fierce opposition to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan help or hurt him with conservative Iowa voters?

Unlike Gingrich’s ‘bomb-throwing’ as Romney put it, Paul remains a steady and sober voice on matters of foreign policy, crony capitalism, and limited government. I don’t agree with him on every issue, but I respect his consistency and his sincerity. These are two qualities in very short supply this election season.

On a side note, Gingrich’s point that the Palestinians are in fact Arab is very odd. Arab people are defined by their linguistic unity. Saudis and Palestinians are Arabs and speak Arabic. Iranians are not Arabic. They speak Farsi. The fact that Palestinians are Arabic does not disqualify them as any nationality. The fact that Americans speak English does not make us citizens of the UK.

"I think that we’ve had an invented Palestinian people who are in fact Arabs and who were historically part of the Arab community. And they had a chance to go many places, and for a variety of political reasons we have sustained this war against Israel now since the 1940s, and it’s tragic," he said.

Most historians mark the start of Palestinian Arab nationalist sentiment as 1834, when Arab residents of the Palestinian region revolted against Ottoman rule.

Modern-day Israel, founded amid the 1948 Arab-Israel war, took shape along the lines of a 1947 UN plan for ethnic partition of the then-British ruled territory of Palestine. Arabs rejected the division.

Gingrich and other Republican candidates are seeking to attract Jewish support by vowing to bolster US ties with Israel if elected.

Gingrich said the Hamas militant group, which controls the Gaza Strip, and the the governing Palestinian Authority, which controls the West Bank, represented "an enormous desire to destroy Israel".

Asked about these [Gingrich’s] remarks, Ron Paul disagreed saying that under the Ottoman Empire neither the Israelis or the Palestinians had an official state. Paul accused Gingrich of “stirring up trouble.” Paul’s views on the Israel-Palestine conflict are controversial.

Unlike many in both the Republican and Democratic parties, Paul has been a harsh critic of Israeli actions against Palestinians, and an even harsher critic of the US government’s unqualified support of Israel – a country he believes should manage its own destiny.

On Twitter, Gary Johnson – who was once again not invited to the debate - echoed Paul saying that Israel will determine its own future and that it’s wrong for us to presume to determine it for them.

Paul has been campaigning hard in Iowa. Can his free-market populism help him pass up Gingrich and Romney in the polls? Will his remarks on Israel and his fierce opposition to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan help or hurt him with conservative Iowa voters?

Unlike Gingrich’s ‘bomb-throwing’ as Romney put it, Paul remains a steady and sober voice on matters of foreign policy, crony capitalism, and limited government. I don’t agree with him on every issue, but I respect his consistency and his sincerity. These are two qualities in very short supply this election season.

On a side note, Gingrich’s point that the Palestinians are in fact Arab is very odd. Arab people are defined by their linguistic unity. Saudis and Palestinians are Arabs and speak Arabic. Iranians are not Arabic. They speak Farsi. The fact that Palestinians are Arabic does not disqualify them as any nationality. The fact that Americans speak English does not make us citizens of the UK.